According to Wikipedia: "Lib Dems seek to minimise state intervention in personal affairs: they oppose what they call the 'nanny state'. Their president's book of office is John Stuart Mill's On Liberty, which defined the harm principle of law."

Which goes like this: "the only purpose for which power can be rightfully exercised over any member of a civilized community, against his will, is to prevent harm to others. His own good, either physical or moral, is not sufficient warrant."

So that sounds awesome. Unfortunately it has big holes in it in the form of special exceptions put there by Mill himself, which undo the whole thing and allow us to be compelled to do stuff because of the side-effects on others, e.g. to stay healthy and pay taxes. He also mentions people "incapable of self-government".

The exceptions I suppose explain this quote from a current BBC news article:"Liberal Democrat Shadow Health Secretary Norman Lamb said last week that the 'best way to prevent alcohol misuse is to put an end to alcohol being sold at pocket-money prices'."

So exactly what the harm principle (or the nanny state, come to that) means to the Lib Dems, I'm not sure. Just about any intervention in personal affairs can be covered by claiming that the affairs are not in fact personal, that a person has a duty to be valuable to others and to do a bunch of random shit, or that the person is "incapable of self-government".

that's one of aptest and giggliest swears i've heard in ages. good work fella|! i'm assuming you're a fella; no ladies i know apart from my wife and a friend who's a cardiovascular ward sister would publicly coin a gloriously pungent term like that.

Aren't there rumours around the net that he's "hung like a donkey"? Which could account for his attractiveness to women (from sheer morbid curiosity if nothing else) and stupidity - based on the fact that there's not enough blood to supply a massive todger and a brain at the same time.

"Wobbly faced cuntshovel" is the best insult I've heard in ages and I am going to endeavour to use it at least once a week.

"DKs precious little cheerleaders"Chirpy little soul aren't you? Agreeing that Lembit Opik is a twat doesn't make you a cheerleader, it makes you a person who is aware that a man in public office who not only hasn't got a clue what's going on but has also knobbed one of the Cheeky Girls is a twat. See?

"I don't mind the epithet. I just query people who attack me for the language I use, whilst at the same time pumping out stuff like wobbly faced cunt shovel. It's hypocritical.

Bit like DK."

If you were referring to my comment then I never criticised your language either. I just suggested that you weren't the most cheerful chap I'd every come across because for some bizarre reason, despite the fact that you think DK and anyone else who follows his writings is tedious and hypocritical you still feel compelled to read and reply with an insult. If you don't like what's on here, why don't you read something you do like and that doesn't bore you? It's not like there's a shortage of stuff on the internet for you to choose from is it?